InBev’s lawsuit over a possible hostile takeover strategy seemed to have August Busch IV a little flustered on Friday. When asked about the main point of the suit — whether shareholders, by written consent, can seek to remove all of A-B’s directors — he at first said yes. At the end of the conference call with analysts, he corrected his answer, saying, “We will challenge InBev’s claim in their lawsuit that they can remove directors without cause.”

The written-consent tactic has been been used only seven times since 2001, according to an analysis by FactSet SharkWatch. And its success is by no means a slam dunk, analyst John Laide writes:

None of the campaigns resulted in the actual removal of a company director although two were withdrawn after the company agreed to the acquisition under sweetened terms. With the exception of Barrett Resources, which was acquired by white knight The Williams Cos. Inc., the remaining companies remained independent.

Four of the companies had no poison pill in place when the hostile action began, but all four adopted one as part of their defensive strategy. That may be relevant here, since A-B let its poison pill expire in 2004.